There won't be any political comments from me, I can't stand nor do I understand politics. It IS hard to refrain from having a political "undertone" though in a topic such as this.

Regarding the video, I just wanted to point out that Ford is involved in China, just as every auto manufacturer is and has been and will be in the future. Also, just wanted to point out that the UAW/unions are involved in Ford's operations and ownership. Despite the feelings of some, everything in the world of Ford is not "hunky-dory" just like it isn't in the other 2 companies of the Big 3.

At the risk of having Jim delete this post,personally I think the United States is pretty great right now.

What other country has the ability to house,feed,provide clean drinking water and electricity and protect their citizens as well as we can?We grow enough food to feed ourselves and export more,our economy can provide financial aid to others and our military has no equal.I think that is pretty great considering everything.

I also have faith in our younger generation.Having "been there,done that"I think when they are through "partying"they will settle down and go to work as generations who came before them did.

Kind of hard to fault US companies for doing business with China when our government borrows from China in order to continue deficit spending.

I just bought a new Ford and love it. Being the recipient of a 6 billion dollar loan isn't even in the same zip code as an 80 billion dollar bailout. Let's compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges.

...yeah those horrible unions...perpetrating atrocities like 5-day work weeks, 8 hour days and safer working conditions on us...what the hell were they thinking? Let the rich make the rules - they're looking out for us, right?...sheesh...

...if you want to complain about bailouts, ***** about Wall Street and the 'too big to fail' banks...

It's the flavor of the week, gulfiend. Seems to me that if you ask most people what it is they actually have against them (unions), they'd just throw back the popular one-liners instead of actually explaining/knowing what they are against/talking about. Unfortunately, seems that facts and truths are pushed aside and ignored nowadays in favor of the bumper sticker slogan movement. Not saying there aren't any negatives in the unions today, not saying that at all. Just explain them, if you have them. Like you mentioned, there have been many, many benefits that have resulted from union influence. People just don't see it nor seem to care.

Originally Posted By: Ohio Oil

I just bought a new Ford and love it. Being the recipient of a 6 billion dollar loan isn't even in the same zip code as an 80 billion dollar bailout. Let's compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges.

Glad you like your new Ford. I didn't say there was anything wrong with buying a Ford. Just don't claim that Ford doesn't have anything to do with China or didn't have anything to do with "bailout" money or "the unions don't own ford"... or wear the shirts saying "NO BAILOUT" or "Built without your tax dollars."

IMO, and many others, a "loan" is a "loan"... an "apple" to an "apple" as you say. Just because one loan is organized differently and termed a "bailout" and the other isn't, doesn't change the fact that taxpayer money was given out to each. The only "apple" to "orange" comparison I see is that 2 were facing bankruptcy and the other wasn't. Truth is though, they (Ford) were facing bankruptcy a few years prior. In that sense, Ford was years ahead of GM and Chrysler. Good timing for avoiding the "bailout" involvement, I guess.

I do have some good news relating to Ford Motor Co. Seems they have been upgraded to "Investment" status by Moody's, as opposed to being listed as "Junk" status for 7 years. That means that all the collateral they gave to be "bailed out" by investors in 2006, they now have control of again. The trademark Ford blue oval that they hocked, is back in the hands of Ford.

The 6 billion in loans Ford received was issued by the Department of Energy with the purpose of helping auto companies meet the new cafe ratings of 35 mpg by 2020...which is a whopping 40% increase. Ford used the money to upgrade facilities to help accomplish that goal.

Nissan, Tesla, battery companies, and many other auto related companies received similar loans from the same program for the same purpose.

It is intellectually dishonest to equate that to receiving Tarp money or assistance from the government to avoid going into bankruptcy.

The 6 billion in loans Ford received was issued by the Department of Energy with the purpose of helping auto companies meet the new cafe ratings of 35 mpg by 2020...which is a whopping 40% increase. Ford used the money to upgrade facilities to help accomplish that goal.

Nissan, Tesla, battery companies, and many other auto related companies received similar loans from the same program for the same purpose.

Yes, the DOE is where the loan came from- which is still a loan consisting of taxpayer money. I realize your point of what it was used for, but like I said before... a loan is a loan, right? When you ask for money, you ask for money. If I remember right, some of the bailout money GM and Chrysler received was to go to same areas- upgrading facilities.

Since I don't know what article you just read, did it mention Ford ASKING for this 6 Billion from Congress? Did it mention Ford asking for 9 Billion of the "bailout" money to be set aside for "emergency" purposes? Of which they didn't end up taking/using.

"Ford CEO Alan Mulally said he'll work for $1 per year if the company has to take any government loan money."

Originally Posted By: Ohio Oil

It is intellectually dishonest to equate that to receiving Tarp money or assistance from the government to avoid going into bankruptcy.

I think you need to re-read my comments below, especially the "apple to orange" comment.

Originally Posted By: GILMORE

IMO, and many others, a "loan" is a "loan"... an "apple" to an "apple" as you say. Just because one loan is organized differently and termed a "bailout" and the other isn't, doesn't change the fact that taxpayer money was given out to each. The only "apple" to "orange" comparison I see is that 2 were facing bankruptcy and the other wasn't. Truth is though, they (Ford) were facing bankruptcy a few years prior. In that sense, Ford was years ahead of GM and Chrysler. Good timing for avoiding the "bailout" involvement, I guess.

Here's a Chevrolet/GM rant for ya... this weekend, if you watch any of the INDY 500 stuff, you'll notice and hear about the reemergence of Chevrolet into the INDYCAR series.

Ask yourself why/how a company that- 1) just got out of bankruptcy, was "bailed out" and owes billions of dollars yet, and 2) left the IRL (former series name, now INDYCAR series) in '05 or '06 because of financial reasons and the fact that the series itself was failing... can afford to spend millions and millions of dollars into a series that frankly isn't popular.

I'm glad to see that an American company will again be represented in the INDY 500, but it seems to me that GM/Chevrolet could find better ways of spending money rather than put millions into a racing program. Any thoughts???